Prime GGG vs Sugar Ray Leonard (Hagler fight) MW

I'm going by Cox article on how to score a fight which in my opinion is the definitive source from a well respected boxing historian
"There are four categories of judging one should educate themselves in to be able to correctly score a fight. Those four are a) "effective" aggression, b) defense, c) ring generalship, and d) clean and hard punching. Let's define these four important categories and then examine some recent matches where these categories were significant in judging the outcome of a particular match-up.


a) Effective Aggression

The key to the first category is the word "effective." One may be going forward, trying to get at ones opponent, forcing them back, but not throwing punches, or missing badly. In order to be "effective" one must have success landing consistently while moving forward. It should be noted that the opponent, who is "out-boxing" or keeping the fight at a distance, can be the "effective aggressor" by initiating the punching exchanges.

b) Defense

A badly over-looked aspect of boxing, especially in scoring a fight. Defense is a part of combat. In boxing it is the ability to hit the opponent without being hit in return. Defense may include ducking, dodging, bobbing and weaving, parrying, blocking, slipping, and sidestepping, as well as effectively utilizing the clinch.

c) Ring Generalship

The person who dictates the tempo of the fight and controls the action in the ring is the ring general. The boxer who makes the other man fight his fight. If fighter A keeps the fight in ring center, and nullifies the "aggression" of fighter B he is the better ring general." Or if fighter B effectively cuts off the ring and forces fighter A to the ropes where he can go to work he then is the better ring general.

d) Clean and Hard Punching

This should be obvious, but it's not. Since many fans and sportswriters ignore the two previous categories they often fail to understand what is actually taking place in the ring. A "clean" blow is one that lands flush without being blocked by his opponent. But how many times has one heard an announcer "Oh what a left hook by so and so!" The problem is the punch landed on his opponent's glove and only made a loud noise and didn't score at all. Some blows are "partially blocked"; meaning it did not land with its full force. Such blows are not "clean" punches. Also it is not the amount of punches that are thrown the matters, but the amount of blows that land. Hard punching is important as the amount of damage a blow causes counts in the scoring. In the amateurs a knockdown is only as good as a jab, but in the pro's its worth much more. One hard right that staggers the opponent though is not worth ten hard jabs that snap back the opponent's head. Damaging blows and their value are difficult to assess and that is why boxing is subjective. However it should be noted that landing 3 or 4 punches that hurt an opponent in the last seconds of a round are not enough to make up for losing the first two and a half minutes of the round where he was out-boxed. After all the name of the game is boxing not slugging!"
If you disagree that's fair boxing is subjective but that's generally where I get my view on scoring fights.

Sure I have all my scorecards saved cause I actually do watch the fights I talk about I don't just yap.

Canelo vs GGG I

Round 1 10-9 Canelo

Round 2 10-9 Canelo

Round 3 10-9 Canelo

Round 4 10-9 GGG

Round 5 10-9 GGG

Round 6 10-9 GGG

Round 7 10-9 GGG

Round 8 10-9 GGG

Round 9 10-9 GGG

Round 10 10-9 GGG

Round 11 10-9 GGG

Round 12 10-9 Canelo

116-112 GGG

 

Bro really? They stole GGG'S win out right. They had a chance to right their wrongs in the rematch and stole the 2nd fight too! Canelo and his fans should feel dirty while pretending all was legit. Even Ring magazine put GGG as # 1 PFP after the fight.

 

discount the Hagler fight. There wasnt much left of him anyways. against more live competition, Leonard didnt fare as well so I must favor GGG by convincing points win. But I wouldnt be suprised to see a stoppage

 

A win over Canelo is a win, camanding or otherwise. A win over Canelo is rare and if a fighter beats him, he deserves credit. Canelo is far better than Martin Murray who was world class in his own right, so it wasn't going to be another beat down. Although alot of us thought it might turn out that way.

 

I'm really surprised you like Monte Cox, he's got some really different beliefs than you. Fair play. I'm going off the BBBofC judging course I did a few years back, anything I could remember but couldn't verify on their website, I didn't post.

Either way, everything in Cox's post is still subjective when applied to a fight. And in the same article, applies them to Quartey vs DLH, which is the absolute epitome of subjective scoring. The criteria for a boxing match is inherently subjective, which is why we haven't had any computers do it well. Even the best modern AI is struggling.

Anyway, in the interest of leaving this debate as level headed people, whose respect for one another has gone up, not down; I do want to say, that "If you disagree that's fair boxing is subjective but that's generally where I get my view on scoring fights." is precisely what I'm saying, too.

My entire point can really be summed up as: "You can find two rounds between 4 & 11 which Canelo won, without being biased against GGG or for Canelo"

This was my card; and yours is every bit as valid (possibly more so, depending on how you view the consensus opinion).

Canelo - GGG
10 : 9
10 : 9
10 : 9
10 : 9* (40/36)
9 : 10*
9 : 10
9 : 10
9 : 10 (76/76)
9 : 10
9 : 10*
10 : 9*
10 : 9 (114/114)

I also watched this fight last Friday at work, but didn't score it. GGG had a lot he could've improved upon - and probably would've done if he wasn't so old by them - and Canelo has a lot he could've done better, too. I came away from that fight again, with the sense that neither seperated themselves from eachother; however I didn't score round by round so it's just a feeling and not an argument I'd seriously defend.

 

There is nothing wrong with any of the results in the Golovkin fights.Believe it or not but i went into the first fight very much a GGG fan, but without bias scored it a draw.I always liked him but since i have been on here all i see is him being very overrrated.The fights were not wrong and crooked only seen as such by fan boys

 

Joey Gilbert was nothing to write home about so just stop with the BS. Ouma hadn't really fought in almost a YEAR prior to GGG and yet GGG had a hard time with Ouma.
Ouma made Taylor look like Ray Robinson at times so just stop with the Taylor would have got busted up had he fought Ouma on the inside nonsense - Taylor absorbed less punishment then GGG did in his bout with Ouma I will tell you that.
Its getting pathetic now with the mention of Joey Gilbert like he was some great boxer Ouma beat when he wasn't.
And when have you ever seen GGG stick and move genius? His main game is n the INSIDE.

 

He has no OFFICIAL WIN over Canelo does he?
And MANY people thought Hagler DESERVED the decision vs Leonard but can you go around saying Hagler has a win over Leonard?

 

When I first got into boxing as a wee lad he was the first historian/analysis I read extensively since then my views have shifted a lot as I developed my own opinions but I still respect his work a lot and I generally base my scoring of fights on his criteria cause I think its a pretty solid one.

Sure, but then it becomes hard to judge which fights we should count as wins and which we shouldn't. Should we consider Whitaker vs. Chavez a win for Whitaker rather than a draw because almost everyone saw it that way? Or take the recent Roach-Davis fight - almost everyone considers it a win for Roach despite the official draw. While scoring is subjective, I think it's reasonable to form consensus opinions based on our collective subjective scores, even if some people disagree. The majority view often reveals what actually happened in the ring.

It seems the only round we really disagree on is 4th and 11th. May I ask why you gave 4th round to Canelo if you remember seems like a clear Golovkin round to me 11th was a bit closer otherwise it doesn't seem we have a huge disagreement about our view on the fight.

 

@Noel857 @George Crowcroft

I agree Canelo/Golvokin 1 being a draw isn't the worst result I scored it 7-5 for Golovkin but a draw isn't out of the question.

But....what annoys me and fans in general is that the 118-110 scorecard was already decided prior to the fight happening so Golovkin wasn't getting a fair decision with 1 of the judges which is total BS.

Another thing aswell is that it seems like a common theme in Canelo fights where he consistently has absurd scorecards so fighters aren't getting a fair shake at winning a decision.

The 118-110 in Golovkin 1 is one example.....

But what about 117-111 vs Lara or 118-109 vs Trout ? Both were close fights yet in all these fights 1 judge had already pre planned that Canelo's opponents weren't getting any chance at winning on the scorecards.

And that's what stinks about Canelo and that's why people get annoyed and claim robbery.

 

Well, when it comes to the first fight it is common knowledge that GGG won it. Those that think otherwise are few and far between. I knew that with all the politics in this situation, that anything other than a GGG beat down of Canelo in this bout, was gonna be trouble. Canelo with his flashy ending was going to give the ones trying to save Canelo from a loss something to work with. I had Canelo losing 2 out of three of the last 3 rounds. I gave Canelo the 12th. I had it 8-3-1 or 9-3 for GGG. There must be a hell of alot of fan boys out there that disagree with your personal vedict.

 

Well if you saw it that way just confirms my statement

 

Nice, I'm that way with @Rumsfeld and his corner. Yeah, I wasn't really expecting to see Cox in this thread lol, but it was a nice surprise.

Yeah, I think that's a very fair way of looking at it. It's part of what makes boxing so intriguing is the human interpretation of it. I hate the Olympics system of scoring based on what's landed clean and what's not. It reminds me of kickboxing point matches or TKD for kids; the human eye and mind is definitely the best method of scoring fights, and everyone has their own preferences.

I thought Whitaker clearly beat Chavez and Lewis beat Holy, but a bit less clear than Whitaker-Chavez. In terms of ranking, I tend to go with whoever came away more impressive. An example would be Beterbiev and Bivol. I really feel like Bivol seperated himself from Beterbiev, and I came away from both fights with a clear sense that Bivol was the better fighter. But that's as subjective as it gets so, idk. And I did come away from both of the Canelo fights feeling he was extremely lucky to have come away from that series without a loss. I haven't actually seen Roach-Davis yet so I'll refrain from commentating on those; but I will say that the idea of calling it a TKO coz Tank turned his back is crazy to me. Similar to when Usyk pulverised Fury in the 9th; and a couple on general considered it a stoppage. That's way too much interpretation imo, and a good showing of why not to let this logical path run it's course to the Nth degree.

I'll rewatch those rounds and score them again mate; as well as the fifth, which I also marked with an asterisks (which I generally denote as being close).

 

Agree the 118 - 110 scorecard was scandalous

 

I dont care if its 7-5, 8-4 or 9-3, for GGG, as long as GGG got that win. You have to be bending over backwards and doing somersaults to give Canelo a draw. The powers that be saved Canelo from his 2nd loss which would have upset the applecart. Now Canelo can strut around with no losses to GGG on his record. Canelo knows in his heart, as do his fans.